1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 200,898,592 to Plaintiff A; and (b) KRW 187,604,241 to Plaintiff B; and (c) KRW 3,000,000 to Plaintiff C and D, respectively.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 14, 2018, at around 00:10, the Defendant driven Fpoter II vehicles under the influence of 0.191% alcohol level in blood, and caused an accident where seven-lane roads, which are three-lane roads in the direction of the East Sea Trith (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”) under the direction of the North Trith Trith (hereinafter referred to as the “instant accident”). While driving along three-lanes in the direction of the East Sea Trith (hereinafter referred to as the “North Trith”) along the three-lane road in the direction of the East Trith (hereinafter referred to as the “the instant accident”).

B. The instant accident G died on the spot due to the cardiopulmonary function transfer, etc.

C. The Plaintiff A and B are the parents of the deceased G (hereinafter “the deceased”), and the Plaintiff C and D are the type, leakage, and leakage of the deceased.

[Grounds for Recognition: Descriptions of Evidence A 1 to 7, and 9, images of Evidence B No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. According to the facts established on the basis of the determination of the cause of the claim, the accident in this case was caused by the negligence of driving the vehicle as a part of the street obstacle display that prohibits the entry of the vehicle while driving the vehicle under the influence of the defendant. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the deceased and the plaintiffs for the damages caused by the accident.

(Article 750 of the Civil Act). (b)

As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant alleged to the effect that the cause of the instant accident occurred on the side of the access road to an expressway, and thus, the Defendant’s liability should be limited. However, the following circumstances, which can be seen by comprehensively considering the background leading up to the occurrence of the instant accident, the description of No. 1, and the overall purport of the pleading in the video of No. 1, which appears in the facts acknowledged earlier, are connected to the Defendant’s assertion, namely, the part adjacent to the two-lane edges in front of the location of the instant accident where pedestrians are allowed to pass pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Road Traffic Act.